The present invention relates in general to modem business data processing systems, and more particularly, to a computer-implemented interpersonal development communications system and directory, and related computer business methods.
The explosive growth of the Internet over the past few years has resulted in the increasing acceptance by both businesses and consumers of conducting transactions over the Internet. Consumers are using the Internet to enhance their personal and financial lives. These consumers are pressed for time, constantly demanding convenience and 24 hour access to information and services. Commercial business enterprises are increasingly turning to the Internet to offer product and services. The present invention capitalizes on the increasing use of the Internet and corporate intranets in order to deliver personalized subordinate, peer and superior profiles and reminders to enhance an individual""s ability to communicate effectively with other people, at different levels of responsibility in the same organization.
A person""s decisions and actions involve a factual element which can be seen and objectively measured, and an intangible element which can be felt and known with certainty but may not be immediately or apparently expressible in reasons, facts and causes. The intangibles such as attitudes, likes, dislikes and beliefs are referred to as values. Moreover, these intangibles are usually considered to be subjective, i.e., to be the personal property of those who know the special meaning of the value words. The problem experienced is that each person""s values seem to belong to him personally, to be his personal property to which others may or may not have access. Axiology, the science of value, provides a solution to this problem by forming a frame of reference which can be applied to all value situations.
The mathematical and logical structure of value concepts is the cornerstone of axiology. This structure allows the measurement of how a person thinks and perceives, rather than what he or she is thinking or perceiving. In other words, value science tells us what an individual pays attention to in his thinking, what is important to him, and what his biases and prejudices are. Axiology explains and measures the thinking processes which form the foundation for, and leads to, behavior.
Conflict occurs when the different perspectives of individuals clash, i.e., because of each individual""s uniqueness, a shared or common decision cannot be reached because each individual""s problems and priorities are different and because each individual""s motivations emphasize different aspects of the same thing. Conflict resolution requires a problem solving technique which incorporates all perspectives into the problem solving process. Axiology is an objective format for measuring intangible attitudes and values. Moreover, axiology measures the level of development and the types of perceptual biases in an individual""s thinking. Value science measures the capacity to value and provides a framework for understanding confrontational values.
The distinguishing feature about axiology is that it incorporates a third dimension into the communications and problem solving process. Every individual has certain basic physical traits, abilities and limitations which medical science can measure. The outward expression of these skills is manifested in an individual""s behavior, in the way an individual uses these inborn and developed skills to relate to his environment. Human behavior can be observed, categorized and measured. The social sciences focus on the explanation of human behavior. There is a third region which stands between and incorporates the physical attributes and their outward manifestations and behavior. This region is an individual""s perception of self and world and the transfer of these perceptions, concepts, and ideas. Value science mathematically defines perceptual capacity and measures the ability to create concepts out of perceptions, i.e., the ability to make value judgments. In effect, axiology measures the why of behavior by measuring the thinking process behind the behavior.
Through axiological analysis, the unique patterns which belong to each individual can be observed and studied in an objective format. An individual""s patterns can be compared to those patterns which can belong to other individuals and can be integrated into actual problem situations. The objective evaluation of each person""s value patterns serves as a means for helping an individual understand his or her potential for development and the blocks which can inhibit personal growth. As a result, the integrity coming from a person""s unique character can be protected. At the same time, the conflicts which can and do occur because of this unique individuality can be understood, and can be prevented or diffused.
While the science of formal axiology addresses areas that are classically addressed by psychology and linguistics, its deductive nature makes it more like physics than natural philosophy. The science of axiology, which was developed by Dr. Robert S. Hartman, is a deductive science of value. It is based on Dr. Hartman""s discovery and definition of the three dimensions of value, their specific and distinct properties, the isomorphic relationship of those dimensions to the concept of sets in transfinite set theory, and the modeling of human decision making with the mathematical models.
The three dimensions of value are the cornerstone of the science. Just as distance and time had to be defined and quantified in order to develop a formula for velocity, so too, the dimensions of value had to be defined and quantified to develop a formula of decision making. Dr. Hartman deduced that the properties of those three dimensions of value (the three ways that things, people, and individuals can be known) had properties that were identical to the three sets of transfinite set calculus. This is similar to a physicist modeling a driver of a car trying to keep a car on the exit ramp of a super highway. The physicist can model the trajectory of a car with the mathematics of physics without the car ever existing or without ever seeing or driving a car.
An example of a deductive process will be trying to predict defined behavior of a sub-group of American, male executives between the ages of 33 and 48, making more than $75,000.00. A person fitting into this group would have probabilities assigned to certain other observed behaviors that are consistent with a certain percentage of the members of this group. So through inductive reasoning, an assertion can be made that there is a 50% chance that the given individual found in this group drives a leased BMW or Mercedes Benz. This is a beneficial discipline, because it permits a social scientists to develop general understanding of certain groups and population. Its limitation is that every aspect of this measurement is relative to other aspects. This results in the applications being culturally and temporally limited.
Dr. Hartman categorized the dimensions of value into systemic, extrinsic, and intrinsic. Systemic value is the dimension of formal constructs; the ideas of how things should be. This dimension is one of definitions or ideas, goals, structured thinking, policies, procedures, rules, and laws. If a person values someone or an object systemically, then that person or object has to fulfill the idea perfectly. There is no middle ground for partial fulfillment in systemic value. The concept is either perfectly fulfilled or not fulfilled at all. Thus, systemic dimension is a very limited dimension. The mathematical properties of this dimension are finite sets and finite elements, i.e., there are a limited number of choices and a limited number of properties for the particular object in question. Too much attention to this dimension results in behavior that is too focused on doing things by the book, a preoccupation with planning and having things done perfectly, a tendency to measure everything and everyone against a preset idea of how they should be, and an inability to be comfortable with changes, unpredictable opportunities, and surprises. When a person ignores this dimension, the resulting behavior is an unwillingness to submit to policies and rules imposed from the outside, a skepticism about the value of spending time and money planning for the future, an inability to hold others to standards and literal agreements, an impatience with processes, and an uneasiness when systems are in place and running smoothly.
Extrinsic value is the dimension of abstracting properties and then comparing those clusters of properties to each other. This is the dimension of comparisons, relative and practical thinking. It includes the elements of the real, material world, comparisons of good/better/best, and seeing things as they compare with other things. This is the dimension of seeing things and their properties as they apply to practical situations. To value a person extrinsically is to compare that person in relation to other persons. This is what a coach of a sports team does when he compares the different players, he sees each player as a combination of skills and abilities and then decides which player will play in a particular position based on how that player""s combination compares with other players. This dimension is one of results and common sense thinking, tactical planning, role satisfaction and social fulfillment. This is the primary dimension of business. Mathematically, this dimension includes infinite possibilities that can be distinguished from each other (denumerably infinite sets). However, for each comparison a limited number of characteristics apply (a finite number of elements or properties). When a person is too attentive to extrinsic value, the resulting behavior will be an overemphasis on getting things done now, a tendency to see other people as practical and political commodities, and a need for things to be changing constantly, getting visible results, and moving forward. When a person does not pay enough attention to extrinsic value, the resulting behavior will be a tendency to avoid unpredictable situations, a discounting of the energy and effort required to get something accomplished, and an avoidance of the fulfilling of social norms and values. These people do not like political dynamics, relative comparisons, or risk.
Intrinsic value is the dimension of uniqueness and singularity. Intrinsic value is the valuing of an object or person with an eye toward its singularity, uniqueness, essence, or spiritual being. When describing or valuing persons or objects in this dimension, one becomes personally involved with the object/person. There is a self-giving to the object/person which is not present in valuing extrinsically or systemically. The object/person is being valued and recognized as irreplaceable because it is seen as unique. Intrinsic valuing is the act of personally relating, empathizing, sympathizing, or intuitively feeling. It is a focus on the wholeness of the person or thing. Mathematically, this dimension includes infinite properties which are not able to be separated from each other. The mathematics of the intrinsic value is one of non-denumerably infinite sets with infinite elements (unlimited possibilities that cannot be individually identified with an unlimited number of elements concerning the person or object in question). This dimension is the richest of the three in its properties. When a person pays too much attention to intrinsic value, he will be overly attentive to the good in others, have a tendency to avoid putting others in uncomfortable positions, and sense a need to have his feelings satisfied in order for a decision to be a good decision. When a person pays too little attention to intrinsic value, the resulting behavior will be suspicion of the intentions of others, a tendency to see others functionally or as part of a system (instead of treating people as unique individuals), and a distant, protected or cold behavior when relating to others one-on-one.
As noted above, formal axiology identifies three dimensions of value. Each of the dimensions applies to both a world perspective and a self-perspective. Therefore, six major aspects of a person""s thinking exist, three about the world-view and three about the self-view. The Hartman Profile measures two different aspects of a person""s thinking concerning each of the six value dimensions. These are capacities to value (called dim scores by Dr. Hartman) and biases for or against that dimension (called valences by Dr. Hartman). A person""s capacity to value can be likened to the resolution of the image the brain forms concerning things in that dimension of value. When the resolution is high, precise or sharp, then the person""s ability to proceed and make judgments is high. When the resolution or capacity to value is low, then that person has a difficult time being precise or forming definitive judgments in that value dimension. A high capacity enables the person to be able to see pertinent input in that value dimension, process that input along with other data in that dimension, and form a judgment in light of the new data. Capacities are that which determine a person""s ability to be reasonable (high capacity) or his propensity to rationalize (low capacity).
A person""s bias for or against a particular value dimension is his negative or positive orientation concerning things in that particular dimension. Biases are the indication of the manner of skewing that a person does concerning each value dimension.
Both the capacity and the bias affect a person""s choices, decisions, judgments and behaviors. It is the behaviors of people that are seen as motivators and demotivators which interpersonal development communications programs seek to reinforce or influence. The reason that these two scores must be consolidated into one score is that they both affect a person""s behavior and choices and do so in relation to each other. By blending these two scores into one, simple and effective comparisons of the different value dimension scores can then be made and both aspects (capacities and biases) are appropriately included in the assigning of behavioral descriptions.
The present invention provides an interpersonal development communications methodology that determines an individual""s interpersonal development profile summary and automatically provides the profile and reminders to an authorized requester that focus on reinforcing an individual""s most important motivators. Differences in motivations and values between the authorized requestor and individual are evaluated and added to the individual""s profile summary. Individual profile summaries are collected based on organization relationships to form a directory, e.g., a management directory that includes profiles: (1) for each of a manager""s subordinates, (2) for the manager""s peers, and (3) for the manager""s supervisors.
An individual logs onto the Internet server on which the interpersonal development (IPD) communication system operates, or an intranet server of his firm or company, or a personal computer or workstation, and takes the Kinsel-Hartman Profile. The individual is required to enter a company/firm code and password to enter the IPD Internet website and then must enter his own code and password. The individual enters his e-mail address so that his individual profile report can be sent directly to him. The individual takes the Kinsel-Hartman Profile which comprises four or five lists of 18 statements each. The first two lists were developed by Dr. Robert Hartman. The other lists were developed by Dr. Robert K. Smith, the inventor of the present invention. The task is to compare the 18 statements or phrases in each list and rank them from best to worse. Through the user interface provided by the application, an individual moves the statements up and down the page until he is satisfied with the ordering.
Each of the 18 statements in each list of the profile are formal representations of value combinations. An individual ranks all 18 statements, he does not do so according to the intention of the words or phrases, but rather he ranks them based on the meaning that each of the statements has to him (the extensions). Therefore, the Kinsel-Hartman Profile provides a model of how a person arrives at meaning and gives a way to compare his extensions with the axiological intentions. It is these axiological values for each of the statements that enable the mathematical ranking of the statement according to their intentions. The resultant profile report presents the person""s blended scores of his thinking, combining his biases and capacities concerning each dimension of value.
Motivations are derived from a person""s positive orientations toward a particular dimension. For example, if a person has a bias of at least 50%, then that person is naturally attentive to things that are rich in those properties, therefore, that person has a natural bias or affinity towards things with those properties, i.e., the person is naturally motivated towards those things. As another example, the person with a positive orientation towards unique aspects (intrinsic value concerning world things) will be naturally motivated when someone asks for his help. This is because a person has an affinity towards other people feeling good, and an aversion to other people feeling bad. Therefore, a natural motivation is for that person to want to help other people.
Clarities get involved in the degree that the particular dimension motivates the person. The higher the clarity, the more the person is able to reason beyond his biases. Therefore, the lower the clarity, the higher the emotional tendency (toward or away from things in that dimension depending upon the bias being positive or negative). Things with positive biases that have low clarities are strong motivations and things with positive biases and high clarities are moderate or mild motivations.
The motivations and values for each individual are compiled into an interpersonal development profile summary for the individual that also takes into account differences in his motivations and values from that of his superior (or peer or subordinate). A directory is created from a compilation of these one page report summaries for each direct report, peer, and superior (collectively, xe2x80x9cmembersxe2x80x9d). Each page for a member in the directory covers three areas: (1) core motivators of that member and how best to manage and relate to a person motivated in that way; (2) reminders about that person that enable the manager be more effective; and (3) analysis of the differences in motivations and values between the manager and member and how those apply at work. Each page for peers or superiors provides insights as to how to be more effective in working with that person. Each directory also includes an appendix that gives a fuller description of the different motivations and reminders.